page

Friday, July 4, 2014

Religious Freedom's Next Corporate Step...?

Funny thing, this isn't so crazy now:












The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Roman-owned pizza chain Little Caesar’s was within its rights to place Christian employees in an arena and then unleash starved, vicious lions and lionesses upon them. The court cited religious freedom as its guiding principle. The 5-to-4 ruling opened the door to potentially thousands of Christian Little Caesar employees nationwide being immediately fed to the top predators of the African savannah. 

Walker gives Industry control over our water. Residents blocked from going to court by Big Government Republicans.

Big government Republicans, the same ones that talk so passionately about local control, just took that precious local control away from Wisconsin communities to protect their water supplies. They did it by taking out...the judicial branch.

Water is there for Big Industry: Imagine the value of your home or business if your water supply dries up because of industry high capacity wells.

Republicans side with Industry: Like I've said before, Republicans are not a farmer’s best friend.  

Judicial Branch Eliminated: What they can't win in court, they'll block from the courts. That’s what Republicans want, along with the loss of local control:
WPR: Starting on Monday, Wisconsin residents can no longer challenge state Department of Natural Resources permits for a high-capacity well if state officials failed to look at what the well might do to overall groundwater in the area. Republican lawmakers and Gov. Scott Walker got rid of the cumulative impacts challenge when they passed the state budget a year ago. 

Amber Meyer Smith of the group Clean Wisconsin. "Really, property owners are losing their ability to protect their property. More and more people … going to lose one more tool in their toolbox to protect their own access to water, for their wells, for drinking water, for access to their favorite lakes and rivers and streams."

A spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robin Vos didn't respond to a request for comment, but has told other media that the new legal language protects the DNR by taking the judicial branch out of the permitting process. Some environmentalists haven't ruled out taking the new limits to court.  

Supreme Court Hobby Lobby Disaster! Decision based on lie.

The Supreme Court is no longer limited to the facts of the case before them. It's a shocking turn Americans should be unhappy with. Hobby Lobby got their way, giving businesses religious rights, because they simply believed something that was not true.

The justices even said as much in their decision. Here's why Hobby Lobby is the conservative courts gift to the religious right. Mother Jones:
Hobby Lobby, a craft supply chain, claimed that Plan B, Ella, and two types of IUD were abortifacients that violated the owners' religious principles. The science was against Hobby Lobby—these contraceptives do not prevent implantation of a fertilized egg and are not considered abortifacients in the medical world—but the conservative majority bought Hobby Lobby's argument that it should be exempted from the law.
The court can now make things up to shape the nations social and economic norms.   

Walker Opposition to ObamaCare Costing Wisconsinites lots on the Exchanges. It'll be getting worse too.

Want to make the Affordable Care Act's exchanges look bad? Intentionally make sure the rates go through the roof, like Scott Walker is doing.

November is the next signup date, and again, Walker's refusal to negotiate premium prices on the exchange will pick the pocket of everyone in the individual market. But that's just the beginning.

Ideological Neglect: I guess if you want to prove a point, you can manufacture a crisis easily enough. Walker is making sure Wisconsin families don't get a break on the exchanges, because he's getting government out of the way lowering prices. The price differences will astound you:
New Report: Wisconsin Health Insurance Costs Higher Due to State Actions: Report finds states which accept enhanced Medicaid dollars, implement robust rate review, and elect insurance commissioners lower health insurance premiums. The report uses statistical research techniques to demonstrate a relationship between state policy choices and health insurance rates. The report is based on first year 2014 premiums rates in 34 states.

The report finds that the average Wisconsin resident will pay over $250 more per year because of failure to accept the funds for BadgerCare, while having a robust system of reviewing insurance rates could have reduced rates as much as $747.12 a year for the average individual plan.
1. In states that opt to reject federal Medicaid expansion funds, first year private insurance individual market rates are on average $373.68 per year higher.

2. States such as Wisconsin which took other steps to limit the "coverage gap" when rejecting enhanced Medicaid funds still had premiums $251.29 per year higher than states which accepted the money.

3. States with robust rate review which includes "prior authorization" for rate increases had first year insurance rate reductions of $747.12 on the individual market.

4. States with elected insurance commissioners experienced a $519.84 reduction in private costs per year on the individual market.
“This report shows that health insurance rates in states like Wisconsin are higher than they need to be,” said Kevin Kane, Lead Organizer for Citizen Action of Wisconsin, who performed the data analysis for the report.

The report finds that contrary to conservative critiques of the Affordable Care Act, state policies are one of the largest determinants of health care cost variations between states

Walker's Crony Jobs Plan Working....

The only time cronyism isn't really cronyism is when Republicans successfully rationalize away the guilt and shame of their behavior...that pretty much stinks to high heaven for everyone else. Our incidental Gov. Walker will be very surprised I'm sure.

Political silence and loyalty comes at a price: I wonder how the two qualified finalist feel right about now?
WSJ: The chairman of the state Public Defender Board on Thursday defended the hiring of a longtime aide to Gov. Scott Walker for the public defender office’s top IT position — even though she didn’t interview for the job and wasn’t a finalist.
Is Official Denial a Jedi Mind Trick?
“As I am sure the questions will fly as to who pressured us into putting her (Cynthia Archer) in this new position, I can assure you this was an internal agency decision and not a decision made for the agency by anyone else,” Danny Berkos, a Mauston defense attorney said.
The unemployed should be so lucky; don’t seek work = get called for job:

Archer was hired as chief information officer for the office at a salary 31 percent higher than her predecessor. Archer also received an 11.7 percent pay raise, to $113,459 annually. Archer was not one of seven candidates who interviewed for the job, nor one of two finalists ... department spokesman Randy Kraft said. The final decision recognized the importance of Cindy’s hands-on knowledge and experience with the agency’s aging technology.”
You think her "hands-on knowledge and experience with aging technology" had anything to do with that secret router?
Archer was among Walker’s campaign and county staff who used private emails and a secret Internet router to hide campaign-related communications from public disclosure. Archer and Walker were not charged with any wrongdoing.

"Narrow" Hobby Lobby decision Expands Again, Female Justices write Scathing Dissent.

The Supreme Court has already expanded their "narrow" Hobby Lobby decision to include all contraception by other Catholic challengers. Now they've made the whole process easier to implement and expand.

Remember when Justice Alito shook his head in disagreement when President Obama disagreed with the Citizens United decision unlimited corporate money in to corrupt elections? Alito grimaced, shook his head, and mouthed “no” and “that’s not true.” He also shook his head and rolled his eyes to the ceiling when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg read her dissent on the affirmative action ruling recently.

It looks like Alito’s “narrow” ruling on the Hobby Lobby decision is turning out to be one big lie as well. In the dark of the night:
The Supreme Court on Thursday evening unveiled its latest ruling around birth control and religious freedom … allow(ing) Wheaton College to skirt ObamaCare's contraceptive provisions as long as the evangelical school informs the government of its religious objections to providing its staff and students with any type of birth control.
The Obama religious “provision” simply required Wheaton College to fill out the EBSA Form 700 … (which is) sent to both the government and the insurance company, that would then provide contraceptives free, using a government subsidy.

But Alito’s narrow decision expanded, due to what conservatives call “legislating from the bench,” by getting rid of the notice to the insurance company. And all without the help of congress.

All the Courts Female Justices Objected:
The decision broke down completely across gender lines — the court's male justices comprised the majority opinion — suggesting that the court's battle over religious freedom and reproductive rights is only going to get more contentious.

Saying the decision "undermines confidence in this institution," Justice Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent, accusing the court of backtracking key elements of its Hobby Lobby decision. "Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Sotomayor wrote. "Not so today."

She said the ruling set up unworkable regulations that risked "depriving hundreds of Wheaton's employees and students of their legal entitlement to contraceptive coverage" and allowed "hundreds or thousands of other objectors" a similar way out.

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Supreme Court Shifts First Amendment rights to Business, creating Religious system free from Government Regulation.

Small government is here, via religious freedom.

The biggest problem I have over the Hobby Lobby decision, besides giving corporations personhood, is the shift in power. A business group of 5 people or less can now overpower an individual’s First Amendment right. One person’s right cannot infringe on another person’s right...right? Supreme Court 101?

Narrow decision my Ass: This supposed narrow decision expanded the next day when the Catholic majority of justices demanded that 6 other Catholic challenges get a second look and changed to reflect their decision. They then threw out other government challenges where businesses won the right to exemption contraception from their employees health coverage.

Here's Rachel Maddow with the details:


Looking ahead, this court made it possible for new businesses to form (a group of 5 people or less), so they could operate free of government regulations.

Theocratic corporate personhood is here to stay. The next step comes when Christians challenge other religious business rights that overpower over their Christian employees. We have just introduced the possibility of religious wars. 

The protest below is a good start getting this message out. Think Progress:
A group of clergy handed out condoms to customers in front of an Illinois Hobby Lobby store on Wednesday, staging a creative, faith-based protest against the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision … Religious leaders also said they hoped the move would draw attention to the danger of allowing employers to privilege their own religious beliefs over those of their employees.

“You can make the religious freedom argument, you can make the argument about contraception, but ultimately, for me, this is about power,” said Rev. Mark Winters, a UCC minister. “Jesus had a lot of issue with powerful people using power over the powerless.”

Serene Jones, President of Union Theological Seminary in New York City, was quick to blast the ruling, saying, “I am horrified by the thought that the owners of Hobby Lobby as Christians think their corporation has a soul, and I’m even more appalled that the Supreme Court agrees.”

Dr. Bruce Powell, the leader of the protest, told News Channel 4 in Oklahoma City, “The right of religious liberty is a fundamental human right. Corporations are legal constructs. They are not human beings.”

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Republican Governors all about Pain, Hurting Voters. That's Leadership.

Since when do we elect politicians to make our lives miserable and piss us off? We don’t.

Yet Gov. Chris Christie is taking his political father figure roll to new and dangerous heights. First, Christie is about to destroy public employee pensions with IOU’s. We've seen this movie before:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie defended his new $32.5 billion state budget … Christie, who has pledged not to raise taxes as governor, used his line-item veto power to eliminate the tax hikes, choosing to delay contributions to the public employees' pension fund to fill the gap, which his administration estimated at $2.75 billion over the current and previous fiscal year.  
The point is, we elect representatives to solve problems, not throw us under the bus with proposals we won’t like. But that’s what passes for leadership these days on the right, not doing what the public wants or likes. What's not to like?
The made clear that he intends to spend the coming months hammering the need for more drastic pension cutbacks and health care savings. "Whenever it's released, it will be universally criticized. And the reason it will is because it will inflict pain," he said, "because there is no other way to fix a severe problem like this but with pain."
In fact, Republican voters would like nothing more than to see peoples pensions plundered and destroyed. After all, why should public employees have something to survive on when no one in the private sector does?
Observers say the kind of tax-slashing, cost-cutting, anti-union rhetoric is exactly what many Republican donors and party officials are looking for. "This gives him an opportunity to make a splash with conservatives by proposing some radical change in the pension system here," said Patrick Murray, the director of New Jersey's Monmouth University Polling Institute. "The more radical it is the more clear it is he's doing it to appeal to conservative voters," he said.

Walker running Wisconsin into the Ground...more spending cuts on the way?

Republicans have only one solution to their tax cutting addiction; when revenues run out, the cut spending again, even when that's a really bad idea. There's no end to the downward spiral.
Democratic Party of Wisconsin: The Department of Health Services reporting a shortfall of $93 million in state tax dollars for the state’s Medicaid fund … According to the White House report, 5,400 fewer people in our state would face crushing, out-of-pocket medical bills each year.  11,200 desperately needed jobs would have been created in our state in the next three years through the expansion. 
Transportation Shortfall nearly $1.5 billion: After borrowing over $250 million for road building in 2014, nothing has been done yet by Walker to fund transportation. On top to that, we got more bad news today:
Instead of shifting into high gear during what is normally the peak of construction season, state transportation departments around the country are easing off the gas pedal as the federal Highway Trust Fund barrels toward insolvency sometime next month.
On average, states will see a 28 percent cut.

And because tax revenues are falling short this year, we’re looking at a possible general fund deficit of $1 billion. 

I hope I'm wrong about this, but as Han Solo would say, "I've got a bad feeling about this."

Muskego-Norway School Districts decide to serve Kids Sh*t for lunch! They love their local kids fat, unhealthy.

It's mind boggling to think that school district officials think they can hide behind the banner of "local control" as an excuse to serve crappy food for lunch. jsonline:
"We believe that proper food nutrition and meal portion guidelines are best decided at a local level," said Rick Petfalski, School Board president for the Muskego-Norway School District.
 And see if you believe this one…
The Central High School District of Westosha also decided to leave the lunch program this spring. "We're not trying to fatten up our kids," district's administrator, Scott Pierce, said "We're trying to give them food they like."
Sounds like a lot of sugary, fatty, salty foods to me. Have at it. 

This has nothing to do with kids not eating their food and throwing it away, they can go hungry just so long, nope this has more to do with politics and the visceral hatred for Obama...Michelle specifically. This is a national movement encouraged by Republicans who blame overreach and big government for making our kids healthier. The horror. 

Even worse, Scott Walker could care less about what our kids eat, because we've got no standards whatsoever:
Wisconsin is one of only 12 states that have not adopted any nutrition standard for its schools on a state-level basis.
But wait a minute, Republican legislators passed a bill banning junk food from the food stamp program. They said it was a waste of taxpayer money. Yet it's okay to feed out kids this stuff?
Rick Petfalski, School Board president for the Muskego-Norway School District: “By leaving the program we will not be required to follow these onerous guidelines, pushed by and large by Michelle Obama, who last I checked has been elected by no one.”

WISGOP: Ban Second Homes, Pay Wisconsin State Taxes even if you don't live here.

I can’t believe I’m going to agree with WISGOP for once. For instance, today is national “I Forgot” day, and WISGOP pointed out some things that Mary Burke forgot. Another WISGOP expose':
“Things Burke Has Somehow Forgotten: Disclosing to voters her swanky second home, which is valued at nearly $600,000.”
I’m with WISGOP on this one. If voters knew she had two homes...? And let's face it, a lot of people don’t have expensive second homes, so why should anyone else have one? Government should definitely ban “swanky” second homes.   
“Things Burke Has Somehow Forgotten: She didn't pay taxes at several points in her career.”
Agreed, Burke and every other non-resident citizen living abroad or working in another state, should pay a Wisconsin state tax. There's just no excuse. 

And here I thought WISGOP’s Joe Fadness wasn’t as smart as Reince Priebus. 

Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Corporate Republicans won the War on Labor, now in control of Campaigns.

It took a banner GOP year in 2010 and 2012 to take control of political funding. No union money in 2012? Just a coincidence?


Pro-Life Wisconsin on the Ugly Side of Hobby Lobby Win.

Men get all the help they want from their insurer, from ED drugs to vasectomies. But women...? The Hobby Lobby win beats back the 60's women's liberation movement with a major crack in the damn.

You don't have to be a part of any political party to know that sex is natural, and not a right bestowed upon us by the Bible for just making babies.  

Freedom...with limits: And what about couples who prefer to go childless. 

To conservatives, sex is dirty without pregnancy. It's not natural to have sex without babies, because the Bible says so I guess. And we are a Christian nation so it makes sense. Sex without babies is a recreational "lifestyle choice," "purely elective," and not natural: 
Peggy Hamill, State Director of Pro-Life Wisconsin: "The Obama administration's decision to grant entitlement status to contraception is thoroughly ideological. It is not medical. Pregnancy is not a disease. Fertility is a natural state - it is not a health impairment to be treated medically with birth control. Birth control to prevent pregnancy is not health care - it's a lifestyle choice. Accordingly, government should not force insurance companies, businesses and individual policy holders to cover or pay for drugs and devices that are purely elective."
 Right wing Tweets say as much, from Raw Story:
Ecstatic at the belief that stupid sluts (“Slut”in conservative parlance=anyone who has sex on purpose while female) are getting punished, they went to Twitter. I collected some tweets and some of the general arguments being floated on Storify. A big theme was the idea  that sex is not a normal part of human life, but some grotesque, exotic, shameful behavior that no proper woman would dare engage in.

Supreme Court ‘s “Money doesn't Corrupt” theory trashed again, as Congress Hides Pay to Play Junkets from the Public.

While the rabid right is distracted by lawsuits and the possible impeachment of our corrupt imperial president, their conservative elected representatives are increasing the power and influence by piling away, unreported, lavish junkets from their wealthy contributors to do their bidding. It's an old magicians trick.

Republicans couldn't make it any more obvious about the influence of money on our political elite! The following admission leaves little doubt. TPM:
House Secretly Kills Disclosure Of Junkets By Congress Members: The House Ethics Committee has quietly done away with the requirement that lawmakers disclose their all-expense-paid trips on annual financial forms, National Journal reported on Monday. The disclosures had been required since the 1970s. Lawmakers must still disclose any privately-paid trips to the House clerk's office, but the financial disclosure form is the "chief document" that journalists and watchdog groups use to review members' finances, according to the Journal.

"This is such an obvious effort to avoid accountability," Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a top watchdog group, told the Journal. "There's no legitimate reason. There's no good reason for it."

Big Business to the Rescue: They will decide a Citizens First Amendment rights. Our new “Leaders?”

My born again conservative friend in Milwaukee called and said the Hobby Lobby decision confirmed for him that we are a Christian nation, and that businesses do have constitutional rights...that they were people.

That was the message he got from our very activist conservative Supreme Court yesterday. My
takeaway?

Conservatives love their “leaders,” and with yesterdays decision on Hobby Lobby, they have given everyone a look at who they think should be in charge.

"Bossy bureaucrats;" what was thought to be a pro-choice term is a deceptive anti-choice reference that defined "boss" (the CEO of a company) to mean a meddling politician. In reality, business bossy bureaucrats are now in charge, and will see part of your private medical records. Here's a down-the-rabbit-hole example, Duluth News Tribune:
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life America, a youth organization that opposes abortion, said in a statement that birth control should be a personal choice.
“As a woman, wife, mother and business owner,” she said, “I am perfectly capable of making my own decisions about birth control without having an employer buy it for me or being forced to provide it against my will to my employees. I control my life, not bossy bureaucrats.”
Employers aren't buying contraceptives for women because contraception is a medical treatment, part of our health care system, administered by doctors.

The Hobby Lobby decision is a giant but welcome step toward plutocracy, or what right wingers call freedom from government. Who would have imagined Americans celebrating the loss of their individual constitutional rights when they go to work. And yet it's happening.

I thought the following observation in Think Progress about the false premise big government wanted to control women's health, was oddly missing in the media’s coverage:
In order to cast themselves as the tolerant side working to empower women, anti-choice activists had stolen pro-choice messaging to obfuscate their position and spread misinformation.

Hobby Lobby supporters’ claims that they were “empowering” women rang particularly hollow. 

There was a cruel visual irony to seeing a crowd of women chanting “women in control” and cheering as the Supreme Court ruled that corporations could control what birth control options are available to their employees. They imagined a false scenario in which government bureaucrats might control women’s health care, and created a future in which corporate bureaucrats will actually control women’s health care. Ban bossy bureaucrats, indeed.
BIG ISSUE: The real problem with the conservative activist Supreme Court decision is the abandonment of the idea that company policies cannot infringe on the individual rights of Americans working for them. That's gone now:
The anti-choice rally also attempted to frame a win for Hobby Lobby as a win for religious freedom, but it’s unclear how that’s the caseA small minority now have the ability to exercise their religious beliefs through corporate practices, but millions of Americans will now have their religious rights unjustly limited.
NEXT UP: Bossy Bureaucrats treatment of pregnant women, if you can believe this one or not:
NBC: The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to consider how much protection a federal law gives to pregnant women in the workplace. The case centers around Peggy Young, a UPS driver in Landover, Maryland, who became pregnant in October 2006 and gave her supervisors a note from her midwife recommending that she not lift packages weighing more than 20 pounds during her pregnancy. UPS said it could not make such an accommodation, and she was required to take an unpaid leave of absence, during which she had no health insurance.

Monday, June 30, 2014

Dark Money and Wisconsin Elections.

In another great report from Fox 6's Mike Lowe, the little known story of dark money, and the influence it has on our elections. Sure, "both sides do it," but really, who's left nowadays? It's not the unions.

Like I've always said, there's an entire economy built around the conservative movement, buying influence and employing every right wing loser rejected by real world employers. You could say it's a job creator for the perpetually unskilled.

The reckless dark money spending on irrational conservative organizations with nothing intelligent to say, proves how bad they'd be running the country:



A secret John Doe investigation is exploring the link between Governor Scott Walker’s recall campaign and outside political groups to see if there was any illegal coordination. Outside groups are spending tens of millions of dollars to get candidates elected on both sides of the aisle in Wisconsin.
 There's also a nice piece at Cognitive Dissidence on dark money as well.

Ginsberg Responds to the Conservative Activist Supreme Court Bullies.

Here's a piece on the Justice Ginsberg descent
Addressing the majority of her colleagues — including all but one of the six men sitting on the Supreme Court — Ginsburg wrote: "until today, religious exemptions had never been extended to any entity operating in 'the commercial, profit-making world.'" 

“The reason why is hardly obscure. Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community. Indeed, by law, no religion-based criterion can restrict the work force of for-profit corporations...The distinction between a community made up of believers in the same religion and one embracing persons of diverse beliefs, clear as it is, constantly escapes the Court’s attention. One can only wonder why the Court shuts this key difference from sight. "In sum," Ginsburg adds about the free exercise claims at the heart of this case,“‘[y]our right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.’” "Although the Court attempts to cabin its language to closely held corporations," she writes,  "its logic extends to corporations of any size, public or private. Little doubt that RFRA claims will proliferate." 
Here’s  more from Ginsberg’s decision, in her own words:
“Again, the Court forgets that religious organizations exist to serve a community of believers. For-profit corporations do not fit that bill. Moreover, history is not on the Court’s side. Recognition of the discrete characters of “ecclesiastical and lay” corporations dates back to Blackstone, see 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 458 (1765), and was reiterated by this Court centuries before the enactment of the Internal Revenue Code. See Terrett v. Taylor, 9 Cranch 43, 49 (1815) (describing religious corporations); Trustees of Dartmouth College, 4 Wheat., at 645 (discussing “eleemosynary” corporations, including those “created for the promotion of religion”). To reiterate, “for-profit corporations are different from religious non-profits in that they use labor to make a profit, rather than to perpetuate [the] religious value[s] [shared by a community of believers].” Citing Braunfeld v. Brown, (1961), the Court questions why, if “a sole proprietorship that seeks to make a profit may assert a free-exercise claim, [Hobby Lobby and Conestoga] can’t . . . do the same?”

But even accepting, arguendo, the premise that unincorporated business enterprises may gain religious accommodations under the Free Exercise Clause, the Court’s conclusion is unsound. In a sole proprietorship, the business and its owner are one and the same. By incorporating a business, however, an individual separates herself from the entity and escapes personal responsibility for the entity’s obligations. One might ask why the separation should hold only when it serves the interest of those who control the corporation.

In any event, Braunfeld is hardly impressive authority for the entitlement Hobby Lobby and Conestoga seek. The free exercise claim asserted there was promptly rejected on the merits. The Court’s determination that RFRA extends to forprofit corporations is bound to have untoward effects.Although the Court attempts to cabin its language to closely held corporations, its logic extends to corporations of any size, public or private.19Little doubt that RFRAclaims will proliferate, for the Court’s expansive notion of corporate personhood—combined with its other errors in construing RFRA—invites for-profit entities to seek religion-based exemptions from regulations they deem offensive to their faith.

Importantly, the decisions whether to claim benefits under the plans are made not by Hobby Lobby or Conestoga, but by the covered employees and dependents, in consultation with their health care providers. Should an employee of Hobby Lobby or Conestoga share the religious beliefs of the Greens and Hahns, she is of course under no compulsion to use the contraceptives in question. But “[n]o individual decision by an employee and her physician— be it to use contraception, treat an infection, or have a hip replaced—is in any meaningful sense [her employer’s] decision or action.”

It is doubtful that Congress, when it specified that burdens must be “substantia[l],” had in mind a linkage thus interrupted by independent decisionmakers (the woman and her health counselor) standing between the challenged government action and the religious exercise claimed to be infringed. Any decision to use contraceptives made by a woman covered under Hobby Lobby’s or Conestoga’s plan will not be propelled by the Government, it will be the woman’s autonomous choice, informed by the physician she consults.

Indeed, approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be “perceived as favoring one religion over another,” the very “risk the Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.” Ibid. The Court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield, cf. Spencer v. World Vision, Inc., by its immoderate reading of RFRA. I would confine religious exemptions under that Act to organizations formed “for a religious purpose,” “engage[d] primarily in carrying out that religious purpose,” and not “engaged . . . substantially in the exchange of goods or services for money beyond nominal amounts.”

More 5-4 Conservative Activist Supreme Court Decisions. Will the Media ever notice? Religious freedom for Companies.

Let's make the Roberts court the most overturned court in U.S. history soon, okay?


We now have the possibility of a separate religious "nation" of companies exempt from constitutional requirements. Reporter Chris Hedges warned us this was highly likely. He was proven right today. And the conservative activist justices, all men, are having their way like never before. This decision is just the first, setting up many more anti-women cases.

Some in the media are saying this is a narrow decision, giving this court a pass again, but it really isn't.















The 5 male justices think they can keep women from getting contraceptive coverage and throwing equality out the window for corporate religious reasons. Instead of science, they allowed the belief of Hobby Lobby to decide their case.

Oh, and this is what women want...to pay out of pocket instead of having insurance coverage:



A Better Idea: Business, say the five conservative justices, can force women to pay their own way. This means that having or not having a child is a woman's "problem." Perhaps woman should take that one step further, and cut men off from their connection to fatherhood too, if and when they choose. They should take custody rights away from these incidental fathers who have so little to do with family planning. Guys apparently want to be free from the burden of birth control, and the justices are using religion to do that.